Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH v3 3/7] x86: make PV hypercall entry points work with !CONFIG_PV

["Jan Beulich" <JBeulich@xxxxxxxx>]

>>> On 05.11.18 at 16:49, <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 05/11/18 15:48, Wei Liu wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 05, 2018 at 08:04:37AM -0700, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>>> On 02.11.18 at 16:55, <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/x86_64/traps.c
>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/x86_64/traps.c
>>>> @@ -298,8 +298,21 @@ static unsigned int write_stub_trampoline(
>>>>  }
>>>>  
>>>>  DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct stubs, stubs);
>>>> +
>>>> +#ifdef CONFIG_PV
>>>>  void lstar_enter(void);
>>>>  void cstar_enter(void);
>>>> +#else
>>>> +static inline void lstar_enter(void)
>>>> +{
>>>> +    panic("%s called", __func__);
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>> +static inline void cstar_enter(void)
>>>> +{
>>>> +    panic("%s called", __func__);
>>>> +}
>>>> +#endif /* CONFIG_PV */
>>> Do we really need two separate stubs (and two separate string literals)
>>> here?
>> I think it is clearer if we have two distinct messages. But I'm not too
>> fussed either way really. If you feel strongly about this, I'm happy to
>> change it to only one function.
> 
> This is the correct way to do it.  __func__ will already be in the
> string table, and the format string (being identical) will be merged.

Why would __func__ be in the string table already, for functions
containing no other references to it?

Jan



_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel